I have to add this - if you're planning to add running to your routine, make sure you're doing it right and I'm sure I'm not the only one who wasn't doing it right. There really is right way and a wrong one and the wrong one will give you shin splints which are a bitch. If you keep going with shin splints, you can pull the muscle out of the bone, or so a doctor told me. Doing it the right way makes running easier, more effective, and less awful. Personally, I'm getting to the point where I enjoy it and I used to do anything I possibly could to get out of it.

Logged

“Call me sentimental, but there’s no-one in the world that I’d like to see get dysentery more than you.” — David Nicholls (One Day)

I have to add this - if you're planning to add running to your routine, make sure you're doing it right and I'm sure I'm not the only one who wasn't doing it right. There really is right way and a wrong one and the wrong one will give you shin splints which are a bitch. If you keep going with shin splints, you can pull the muscle out of the bone, or so a doctor told me. Doing it the right way makes running easier, more effective, and less awful. Personally, I'm getting to the point where I enjoy it and I used to do anything I possibly could to get out of it.

hm, most of that information seemed to be pretty common sense to me. although I'm already aware of my posture most of the time anyway, thanks to yoga.

the bit that's new to me came from behind one of those links, that your "stride turnover", the number of steps per minute should most optimally be 180 per minute?? that sounds like an awful lot to me. I've been running to music ever since I started (well I did before, but only with music it became any fun for me), see my mixes thread in Bring&Brag for examples, but they're all at 142-145 BPM, and I do take a step at each beat, helps me keep the pace. It's a bit of an odd suggestion anyway, since afaik, you're going for the optimal physical pendulum (rod) swing of your legs, which has a lower frequency when the legs are shorter. Also there's very few music that sounds good at 180BPM. I could speed up some of my mixes, and just try it out, see how it works, but from when I got started I found the higher BPMs didn't feel right, I actually moved back a bit from 145 to 142-143 because it felt more comfortable. But if they're right about a faster stride having less impacts on the joints, then I guess it's worth it. But really, 180BPM sounds like a fuck of a lot, I wonder if I could even keep up with that... are there any other sources quoting this number? Or maybe a table corresponding to leg length?

I have to add this - if you're planning to add running to your routine, make sure you're doing it right and I'm sure I'm not the only one who wasn't doing it right. There really is right way and a wrong one and the wrong one will give you shin splints which are a bitch. If you keep going with shin splints, you can pull the muscle out of the bone, or so a doctor told me. Doing it the right way makes running easier, more effective, and less awful. Personally, I'm getting to the point where I enjoy it and I used to do anything I possibly could to get out of it.

hm, most of that information seemed to be pretty common sense to me. although I'm already aware of my posture most of the time anyway, thanks to yoga.

the bit that's new to me came from behind one of those links, that your "stride turnover", the number of steps per minute should most optimally be 180 per minute?? that sounds like an awful lot to me. I've been running to music ever since I started (well I did before, but only with music it became any fun for me), see my mixes thread in Bring&Brag for examples, but they're all at 142-145 BPM, and I do take a step at each beat, helps me keep the pace. It's a bit of an odd suggestion anyway, since afaik, you're going for the optimal physical pendulum (rod) swing of your legs, which has a lower frequency when the legs are shorter. Also there's very few music that sounds good at 180BPM. I could speed up some of my mixes, and just try it out, see how it works, but from when I got started I found the higher BPMs didn't feel right, I actually moved back a bit from 145 to 142-143 because it felt more comfortable. But if they're right about a faster stride having less impacts on the joints, then I guess it's worth it. But really, 180BPM sounds like a fuck of a lot, I wonder if I could even keep up with that... are there any other sources quoting this number? Or maybe a table corresponding to leg length?

Find some that sound good at 90bpm?

Or ignore that bit of drivel. Sounds like someone who was brainwashed by military double time march bullshit.

90 BPM is kind of like slow reggae dub though afaik even "chase the devil" is 100BPM (famous from the sample in Prodigy's Outer Space track--original is cool as well though). I guess I'll give it a go, just to see how it goes.

Hehehehe Squarepusher is a bit too irregular to run to for my tastes (apart from that he's awesome, btw).

Anyway, I just speeded up one of my running mixes from 145BPM to 160BPM for a tryout... Well it's certainly interesting [the music itself turned out fine, btw, I used a combo of +6% tempo and +4% speed, together making 160BPM, while changing the pitch only 4% and still retaining a decent sound quality]

Having tried that, now I don't believe for a second that any normal person could actually run to 180BPM. Maybe they were talking about the 100m Olympic sprinters or something.

Anyway, turns out that 160 is ever so slightly too fast for me. I noticed I wasn't able to keep up with all the steps, skipping. You notice because suddenly the snare-drum is at your left foot while it was at your right a minute ago

So next time I'll just load a 150 and 155 BPM version to my mp3 player, see what works best.

And who knows, in a week or two I might be able to keep up with the 160 one as well. I just don't think I'd ever be able to do 180 without having some professional coach telling me exactly how to move my legs and such.

Hehehehe Squarepusher is a bit too irregular to run to for my tastes (apart from that he's awesome, btw).

Anyway, I just speeded up one of my running mixes from 145BPM to 160BPM for a tryout... Well it's certainly interesting [the music itself turned out fine, btw, I used a combo of +6% tempo and +4% speed, together making 160BPM, while changing the pitch only 4% and still retaining a decent sound quality]

Having tried that, now I don't believe for a second that any normal person could actually run to 180BPM. Maybe they were talking about the 100m Olympic sprinters or something.

Anyway, turns out that 160 is ever so slightly too fast for me. I noticed I wasn't able to keep up with all the steps, skipping. You notice because suddenly the snare-drum is at your left foot while it was at your right a minute ago

So next time I'll just load a 150 and 155 BPM version to my mp3 player, see what works best.

And who knows, in a week or two I might be able to keep up with the 160 one as well. I just don't think I'd ever be able to do 180 without having some professional coach telling me exactly how to move my legs and such.

We run at approx 180bpm in formation singing cadence. It is too slow for me. I am far from being an Olympic quality runner. That being said, I still hold that 180bpm being some ideal running pace to a load of shit. Run what is comfortable for you. Constant forward motion is more important, especially if you are running solely for exercise.

180 steps per minute?? for serious? that's left-right-left in one second, yeah? for how long?

when I just did that 160 steps per minute running, I didn't have the feeling my legs would be able to move much more than that.

in that case, I wonder how quickly I'd move up from 150 to 155 to 160 ...

Not each foot. just when every right foot strikes the ground. That might be the disconnect. That pace should be sustainable for at least an hour for someone in decent condition, but 20-30 should be attainable for someone starting out.